MOHIBULLAH HANIF Versus State
The appellant, a member of the teaching community, challenged his conviction and sentence under Section 228 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, imposed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, for writing letters containing insulting and contumacious remarks against a Presiding Officer during bail proceedings. The core legal question was whether the appellant’s conviction for intentional insult to a public servant sitting in a judicial proceeding should be maintained, or whether his subsequent unconditional apology and the passage of time warranted acquittal. The Lahore High Court, noting that the appellant declined to argue the merits of the case and instead tendered an unqualified, abject apology, exercised its discretion to grant clemency. Relying on the principle that an unconditional apology can mitigate the consequences of contemptuous conduct, especially when weighed against the mental anguish and prolonged duration of the litigation, the Court allowed the appeal. The impugned judgment was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted, emphasizing that judicial leniency may be appropriate where genuine repentance is demonstrated to avoid a travesty of justice.
- Can an unconditional apology tendered by an appellant in open court justify the setting aside of a conviction under Section 228 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Does the prolonged duration of litigation and the mental anguish suffered by an accused constitute valid grounds for exercising judicial clemency in a criminal appeal?
- Section 228, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU, J.--- Mohibullah Hanif appellant after having been convicted under section 228, P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo for one month's S.I and to a fine of Rs.500/- in default thereof to further endure S.I for 7 days vide impugned judgment dated 16.05.2007 handed down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, has filed the instant appeal to acquittal.
2. Brief facts of the institution of instant appeal are that during the proceedings of an anticipatory bail application in a case registered vide FIR No.733 dated 19.11.2006 under sections 354, 147, 148, 186, 353, 337-A(i), 337-L(ii), at Police Station Ichhra, Lahore. The appellant (Mohibullah Hanif) had written certain letters containing insulting, objectionable, derogatory contumacious as well as despicable remarks against the learned Presiding Officer intending to insult him and to undermine the dignity, prestige and authority of the Court and on his contuminal behavior, was tried summarily to conviction and sentences.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has shirked to argue on merits but straightaway faithfully has tendered unconditional apology of the appellant and the appellant himself has also made an un-conditional downright apologetic statement before the Court having shown his repentance as well as pitience realizing his contemptible as well as contumacious act committing himself to remain faithful in future towards the judicial officers being a member of lettered community and shall avoid any flippancy as well as frivolity to them by placing him at the mercy of the Court. Lastly it has been submitted as ace that the appellant is in the corridors of courts since 2006 has already met sufficient anguish as well as ordeal and he may be relented to forgiveness by accepting the appeal to save his future carrier, otherwise, may fall in a pit to worrisome.
4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General has opposed the submissions, raising counter arguments has submitted that the appellant is not only an educated but is also a member of teachers community so he being one of the nation nation-builder (path-finder) has not only displayed disrespectfulness towards the system of law but has also attempted to undermine the dignity and honour of the court posing him as a sapient, therefore, such like accused may not be dealt with lenity even otherwise, appellant has not contested the appeal on merits, therefore, the same may be dismissed.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. As the learned counsel for the appellant has not argued the appeal on merits but has placed the appellant at the mercy of court by an unconditional apology, therefore, it is considered piddling to dilate upon the merits of the case as un-conditional apologetic statement made by the appellant in the open Court is taken into consideration for the decision. In this regard the Court has been guided by a precedential law handed down in the case of Ramachandra Mahapatra v. State of Orissa (AIR 1983 SC 508) wherein the Hon;ble Supreme Court of India has held as follows:
"We have gone through the record of the case. The appellant wrote the letter containing scurrilous allegations as stated above in the year 1974 and he was found guilty of the offence under the Contempt of Courts Act in the year 1975. He is now on bail pursuant to an order made by this Court for nearly 8 years. Shrivinoo Bhagat, learned counsel for the appellant very fairly submitted that the appellant should not have written the letter in question and he had done so when he was under great mental stress owing to certain proceedings which had been initiated against him by his wife who had abandoned him. He again reiterates before this Court that the un-qualified apology tendered by the appellant before the High Court may be accepted and that the sentence imposed on the appellant may be set aside. Having regard to the nature of the accusation and the delay of eight years we are of the view that this is a fit case in which we should accept the unqualified apology tendered by the appellant and set aside the sentence imposed by the High Court him. We accordingly accept the unconditional apology tendered by the appellant and quash the sentence imposed on him by the High Court in these proceedings. The appeal is accordingly allowed."
It has also been noticed that the appellant remained in an untold disquiet seeing the bars of prison in his dreams for a period of 9 years keeping in view his an un-conditional abject apology and considering his prolonged journey as being justice seeker, the Court aproposly considers clemency and commiseration to avoid travesty of justice in the dismissal of appeal, therefore, by cogitating all pros and cons of the case the instant appeal is accepted. Impugned judgment dated 16.05.2007 is set aside and the appellant is acquitted of the charge, being his on bail his surety is relieved. Criminal revision petition filed by Faisal requesting enhancement of quantum of sentence is dismissed being not prosecuted.
HBT/M-115/L Appeal accepte